The Christmas party 'jab' (VERY long)

[Venus193]

Cheyne, I think you're right.

I worked with a "Katie" once; I will call her "Tiara" because she thought herself a queen.  She used to ignore all the women in the company and kiss up to the men.  Once I arrived a bit early and saw her in a clingy sweater without a foundation garment.  Half an hour later she was wearing said foundation garment, so her boss or an HR person probably called her on the carpet.

I used to keep a big candy bowl on my desk back in an open office environment.  Tiara came over to the bowl, took a couple of pieces and not only didn't thank me or comment on my generosity, she pointedly turned her back on me when I looked up.  We didn't have any accounts in common, but one day I had lunch with the colleague (same title as me who worked on her account) and learned that she treated all the women in the office the same way... except for her boss.

Not long after that conversation Tiara was out the door.

If Katie doesn't grow up, this will happen to her.

[Yvaine]

I worked with a "Katie" once; I will call her "Tiara" because she thought herself a queen.  She used to ignore all the women in the company and kiss up to the men.  Once I arrived a bit early and saw her in a clingy sweater without a foundation garment.  Half an hour later she was wearing said foundation garment, so her boss or an HR person probably called her on the carpet.

Da heck? Did she have one in her purse just in case? 

[Venus193]

I guess so, because there would not have been enough time for her to go out to buy one even in the store around the corner (which I don't think was open yet).

At any rate, the Tiaras and the Katies of this world don't last long unless they learn how to behave.

[Winterlight]

Aaahhhh, I forgot to mention something in my initial post.  Sharon said that Katie has a habit of walking by her (Sharon’s desk) and grabbing a pen, post-it, candy, etc – whatever she wants or needs at that moment - and rarely even acknowledges Sharon.   She figured the only reason Katie even asked if she could have candy was because an outsider was with her.

So, the “Hello, btw” was meant as a reminder that’s it’s appropriate to be civil prior to grabbing something off a co-worker’s desk.  (I didn’t get the feeling that Sharon is territorial about her candy or that she uses it as a way to get people to talk to her.  Not at all.)

So, it was done to scold/teach her, and it was done in front of an outsider. Yeah, Sharon screwed up. If it bothered her that Katie didn't talk to her, she needed to address that privately. And then Katie was a snot right back. Now they need to drop it, and it doesn't sound like Sharon has. She needs to own that she was rude, and then move on. She doesn't need to be best friends, but she should be polite. I think Katie realized she went too far at the party and tried to improve things with the "nice outfit" comment.

Agreed. Sharon didn't need to do that.

[DollyPond]

I worked with a "Katie" once; I will call her "Tiara" because she thought herself a queen.  She used to ignore all the women in the company and kiss up to the men.  Once I arrived a bit early and saw her in a clingy sweater without a foundation garment.  Half an hour later she was wearing said foundation garment, so her boss or an HR person probably called her on the carpet.

Da heck? Did she have one in her purse just in case? 

I worked with one of those.  Her trick was to sit in meetings with her male supervisors with her legs spread wide apart suggestively "offering" up what was there.

It didn't save her from being fired for incompetence and not showing up to work though.

[FlyingBaconMouse]

Even if Katie is a bit obnoxious, I'm not sure where the jump from "talks about guys and fashion" to "is Sharon Stone in Basic Instinct" is being made. I don't talk about a lot of serious things at my workplace either, not least because I'm pretty sure my political and religious views aren't very mainstream for my area. 

On the other hand, I do think Katie was obnoxious at the Christmas party. I envy her, though, because if someone had said to me what Sharon said to her (I am assuming the tone was corrective), I'd just avoid that person at all costs. I certainly wouldn't have forgotten about it in the interval between the incident and the party: I just wouldn't say anything, constructive or otherwise.

[cheyne]

Sharon was recently talking to the Office Manager about business, and OM slyly brought up Katie’s name, asking Sharon how she felt about her.  Sharon simply said “I really don’t know her well; our contact is minimal” but was careful not to say anything about the party incident or her negative feelings about Katie.  (When Sharon relayed the incident to me, she referred to Katie as an airhead.)

This bothers me.  Why would the OM "slyly" bring up Katie's name?  If the OM believes that there are issues between the two women that might affect the workplace it is her job to get to the bottom of it and clear the air.  (Or to alert the women's supervisors to the potential problem if personnel are not part of her job). "Slyly" asking Sharon how she feels about Katie is not professional and will just contribute to the bad feeling between the two women.  It almost sounds like the OM is trying to participate in office gossip.

I think Sharon is actually taking the high road in this situation.  Even if Sharon was correcting or a bit PA in her initial "Hello by the way" she has definately done the right thing since.  (And I don't believe a smile and "hello by the way" when someone is reaching into your bowl of treats without a by your leave is either snotty or PA.)

[TootsNYC]

Katie absolutely DID give a "by your leave" (which means, specifically, "May I?")

She asked "can I have one?"

That's a "by your leave."

She just didn't say "Hi, Sharon," first.

[wolfie]

Katie absolutely DID give a "by your leave" (which means, specifically, "May I?")

She asked "can I have one?"

That's a "by your leave."

She just didn't say "Hi, Sharon," first.

It is pretty rude to walk up to someone and ask for something without even acknowledging their existence.

[jmarvellous]

Katie absolutely DID give a "by your leave" (which means, specifically, "May I?")

She asked "can I have one?"

That's a "by your leave."

She just didn't say "Hi, Sharon," first.

It is pretty rude to walk up to someone and ask for something without even acknowledging their existence.

Since when is addressing someone directly and politely in any way equivalent to not acknowledging their existence? This seems like searching for offense.

I think this situation started with rudeness on Sharon's part and escalated from there. The two should avoid all but essential communication from here on out.

[wolfie]

Since when is addressing someone directly and politely in any way equivalent to not acknowledging their existence? This seems like searching for offense.

I think this situation started with rudeness on Sharon's part and escalated from there. The two should avoid all but essential communication from here on out.

From the op

"She reached into the candy bowl and said “Oh, these look good.  Can I take a few?”"

I guess technically it is addressing someone directly and the words are polite but  I would be taken aback if the first words out of someone's mouth were "can I have that?" and when I said hello i got a sour "hello" back.

[Queen of Clubs]

Plus, the OP clarified in a later post that this is an ongoing habit of Katie's - taking stuff and not even acknowledging Sharon's existence.

Aaahhhh, I forgot to mention something in my initial post.  Sharon said that Katie has a habit of walking by her (Sharon’s desk) and grabbing a pen, post-it, candy, etc – whatever she wants or needs at that moment - and rarely even acknowledges Sharon.   She figured the only reason Katie even asked if she could have candy was because an outsider was with her.

So, the “Hello, btw” was meant as a reminder that’s it’s appropriate to be civil prior to grabbing something off a co-worker’s desk.  (I didn’t get the feeling that Sharon is territorial about her candy or that she uses it as a way to get people to talk to her.  Not at all.)

I'd be peeved with Katie if I were Sharon.  I don't think Sharon handled that 'btw, hello' well, as it was meant to chide, but Katie's actions at the party were ridiculous.  I don't blame Sharon for keeping her distance.  IMO, Katie's being childish.

[onyonryngs]

They're both wrong.  Sharon's response was extremely condescending.  And Katie's party comment was childish.  But there isn't anything wrong with talking about fashion.  It seems the OP is set up so that we're supposed to be on Sharon's side rather than Katie's, but that may just be how I read it.

[oceanus]

They're both wrong.  Sharon's response was extremely condescending.  And Katie's party comment was childish.  But there isn't anything wrong with talking about fashion.  It seems the OP is set up so that we're supposed to be on Sharon's side rather than Katie's, but that may just be how I read it.

OP here.

I know Sharon personally.  She relayed the story to me.  I've never met or seen Katie.  The backstory combined with the information I was given about the Christmas party leads me to believe that Katie is a high-school 'mean girl'.  However, if you review the thread you'll see I said Sharon could have responded differently re: the candy dish exchange AND in several of my posts here I've said I feel Sharon needs to ease up and be a little more friendly/civil.

[cheyne]

From the op

"She reached into the candy bowl and said “Oh, these look good.  Can I take a few?”"

It sounds like Katie had her hand in the bowl before she asked Sharon for some treats.  This may be a trigger for me, but I wouldn't grab something and then ask for it, I would ask first (and accept No for an answer). 

Bottom line is that perhaps Sharon started it, perhaps Katie escalated it, but Sharon does not have to be "friendly" to Katie.  She just needs to treat her professionally and not contribute to office gossip (which it sounds like she is already doing).